All school zones and most residential neighborhoods in sweden have a 30 kmh speed limit.
30 kmh is a huge tipping point when it comes to pedestrian fatalities. below 30 kmh, a majority of pedestrians hit by a car will survive, above 30 kmh, a majority of pedestrians by a car will die.
Frankly I feel uneasy when I'm driving around at 50km/h on residential streets. It's just too fast to be able to react to a kid or an animal jumping out from behind a parked car. So not only is 50 more lethal, it also reduces reaction time and increases braking distance. It's crazy that anybody ever thought this was a good idea to begin with.
A lot of french cities are limited to 30km/h. It reduces the number of fatal accident, promote alternative mobilities and some studies showed that it actually increase the average car speed.
Lowering the maximum speed reduces the amount of traffic so in fine even if the maximum speed is reduced the travel time by car is reduced too.
Cool chart! Why does this end arguments about setting the speed limit though? Is 10% fatalities an acceptable level for pedestrian/cyclist collisions? Sorry if I'm not interpreting it right.
I don't disagree with you, however even this chart is probably biased because everyone drives at or above posted limits. Once you lower all the limits this chart will shift left, however, the slower you are moving the more reaction time you have and accidents that do occur are less fatal or destructive, so maybe in the end it will reduce accidents. I will be curious to see after a few months or a year of data.
While I haven't read the original source material, the labels for the chart are for collision speeds, not posted speed limits for collisions.
It's true that there's a large problem in many places with speed limit compliance, but this is primarily a problem of design - the streets encourage driving at speeds that are higher than the posted limit - and secondarily about enforcement, or lack thereof.
I agree that there are likely fewer accidents occurring at lower speeds as well, given that they are easier to avoid at those speeds. This is also a good argument for 30 km/h max speeds in urban areas.
I'm guessing they piloted this first, but the difference in speed limits between transit and adjacent regular vehicles seems dangerous to me.
In general, I find that speed limits are more effective when they are accompanied with the actual infrastructure... If you have a big wide avenue with few obstacles and smooth asphalt, people will tend to drive faster. Squeeze the lanes down, add planters along the side, a rough surface (e.g. cobblestone or brick), etc., and people will naturally allow down.
My vehicle almost idles at that speed! Hope it works out for them. You could probably go faster on a bike. You know what I'm going to do? Read the article. I'll be back with an edit if needed.
Edit: 80% of Amsterdam will have a speed limit of 30km/hr to increase safety and reduce noise.
Yeah, that's kinda the point. I'm a gear head through and through, and I support fewer cars in the city, it is not where they belong. I just spend 15 minutes driving around looking for a parking spot tonight. I wished I'd just been able to hop off a train.
"Sensible." If that were the speed limit in the US, we'd probably need to triple the amount of asphalt on the ground to handle the gridlock of people being limited to 18MPH.